“Everyone understands that a power struggle has taken place behind the scenes, and that the violence is connected to that power struggle”, – states Ivar Dale, Senior Policy Adviser at Norwegian Helsinki Committee in an interview with CABAR.asia analytical platform.
The international human rights organisation Norwegian Helsinki Committee has been observing and documenting human rights violations in Kazakhstan and other countries in the region in detail since long ago. CABAR.asia spoke with Ivar Dale, senior policy advisor to the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, about the situation of protests in Kazakhstan in the context of human rights and international law.
CABAR.asia: How would you comment on the recent January protests in Kazakhstan? Do you agree with the statement of the Kazakhstani authorities that the unrest is the responsibility of terrorists?
We don’t find the narrative initially presented by the authorities to be entirely credible. It seems that the authorities know more about who the violent elements were, than they are saying officially. In his speech on January 11, President Tokayev recognized some of the reasons behind the tragedy, such as the extremely high level of corruption among the elite in Kazakhstan. In the name of transparency, he should go further and speak the truth about what happened behind the scenes this week, and who were responsible for the violence.
How do you assess the actions of the Kazakhstani security forces during these protests? What does international law say about this?
We don’t know yet how security forces treated civilians during the unrest. We have seen some pictures of people who clearly have been beaten and mistreated. At the same time, Kazakhstan has been under communications lockdown We believe this was done partially to prevent information from reaching news agencies abroad.
How should foreign countries and international organizations respond to the events in Kazakhstan?
The demand at this point must be for truth. Not only about the events this past week, but a recognition of human rights violations that have taken place in the country for several years. Everyone understands that a power struggle has taken place behind the scenes, and that the violence is connected to that power struggle. Only the authorities themselves can stop the speculations, which may, in the long run, harm the interests of the people of Kazakhstan. There is little point in spending resources on promoting Kazakhstsan in foreign media when at the same time, independent media abroad are writing about the negative aspects of the authoritarian regime in the country. With its natural resources and highly educated population, Kazakhstan has every opportunity to take a leading role in Central Asia, and in the CIS, as a well-functioning democracy.
Kazakhstan called on CSTO forces to stabilise the situation. How legitimate was this action?
The CSTO was established to deal with external threats. President Tokayev claims intervention was qualified by the presence of “international terrorists” in Kazakhstan. We have yet to see convincing evidence of this. Foreign troops should withdraw as soon as possible. It is encouraging to see that civil society in Kyrgyzstan spoke out against it, this is perhaps evidence of a more developed civil society in that country than in some other CSTO member states In Kazakhstan, there are many strong NGOs who will be important in documenting violations and independently establishing a chronology of the events. The authorities should let them work and not intimidate NGO staff or hinder their activities.
Thousands of people were detained during the protests. How can they be given a fair hearing?
We have seen the reports of thousands of people arrested. Our concern now is under what conditions these people are being held. Where are they being kept? What’s happening to photos and videos on their phones? There are reports that consular officers of foreign states are not allowed to see detainees. How are Kazakh citizens being treated? Gradually, stories about how detainees were treated are bound to seep out.Some analysts believe that Kazakhstan will “tighten the screws” after these events. What do you think will happen to the human rights situation in Kazakhstan?
Tokayev recently singled out human rights defenders and journalists as partially responsible for the chaos. Leading Kazakh human rights expert Evgeniy Zhovtis recently said in an interview that he believes the speech was written by a specific individual in the government who has traditionally been negative towards NGOs, with the assistance of Russian speech writers. Let’s hope he is right in his analysis, as he usually is. Because that means Tokayev has an opportunity to change course. His latest speech, recognizing corruption among the elite is welcome. In many ways, he has incorporated what civil society in Kazakhstan has been saying for years, if not for decades.
It is disconcerting to see that in the midst of this crisis, authorities in Kazakhstan have found time to write a letter to Moscow-based news outlet Fergana News, threatening them with criminal persecution for one of their analytical articles. This is not the right approach at a time when authorities need to rebuild trust.
Will there be changes in the work of human rights organizations in Kazakhstan and human rights defenders themselves?
That’s an important question that people in the human rights community are asking themselves, both in Kazakhstan and internationally. I hope that Tokayev’s initial speech singling out human rights defenders and journalists as somehow responsible for what happened in Kazakhstan this week was an expression of the crisis he found himself in, rather than an indication of what’s to come. Kazakhstan needs to improve its human rights record, not make it worse.
Events in Kazakhstan once again demonstrated the lack of independent media in this country. In this aspect, do you think that the authorities will continue to clean up the information space or will lessons be learned about the need for independent media?
Again, we have to wait and see how things will develop. Authorities made it difficult for independent media to function during the crisis by turning off the internet. It’s good that some Telegram channels were able to bring pieces of information about developments during the blockade. The president needs to reassure journalists in Kazakhstan as well as the international community that respect for the media will be central in the time to come. The OSCE Representative for Freedom of the Media, made an important statement about this issue, and several UN Special Rapporteurs made a statement yesterday urging respect for human rights during this crisis. Importantly, the UN rapporteurs also pointed out the president’s misuse of the term “terrorists” in his speeches.
In general, do the recent events in Kazakhstan indicate a crisis of democracy? Can we say that autocracies have firmly established themselves in all the countries of Central Asia?
There are, unfortunately, no functioning democracies in Central Asia. Kyrgyzstan has had periods of great openness, and many attempts at establishing democracy, but we continue to see serious challenges to democracy and human rights there as well. For a while, it seemed like Tajikistan and Uzbekistan switched places – the former cracked down on opposition and media and isolated itself, while the latter finally opened up to international organizations and media. But in Uzbekistan as well, reforms still have a long way to go. Authorities in Kazakhstan have always claimed democratic reforms take time, they have made changes on the surface while really remaining authoritarian. Opposition is not permitted to participate in elections, freedom of assembly is severely curtailed, and independent media is regularly closed down and human rights activists are harassed. This is a well-known fact, and unfortunately it is detrimental to Kazakhstan’s reputation internationally. In many ways, authoritarian regimes are put in place in order to protect corrupt elites. But these kinds of systems tend to fall apart. Unfortunately, regular people are the ones who pay the price. That being said, I believe democracy will eventually come to Central Asia, one way or another.